- Unbeliebable: White House turns Bieber petition response into immigration screed
- Obama signs law denying Iran ambassador’s visa, but says law is ‘advisory’
- Mich. judge to laughing convicted killer: ‘I hope you die in prison’
- Man charged in Kansas City-area highway shootings
- Keystone XL pipeline still on hold after State Dept. decision
- Fla. man charged with killing 16-month-old son to play Xbox undisturbed
- Drones from the deep: Pentagon develops ocean-floor attack robots
- Michigan mayor slaps back atheists’ try to erect ‘reason station’ at city hall
- PHILLIPS: Where is the conservative establishment?
- 7.5-magnitude earthquake shakes southern Mexico
Senate Democrats push phased Iraq redeployment
Top Senate Democrats, who last week voted against a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq, yesterday introduced a measure to start a phased troop redeployment by the end of the year.
Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan said Iraqis must stop looking at the United States as a “security blanket” with an open-ended commitment of support.
“The administration’s policy that we’ll be there as long as Iraq needs us will result in Iraq depending upon us longer,” Mr. Levin said before introducing the amendment to the defense authorization bill being considered this week. “Three and a half years into the conflict, we should tell the Iraqis that the American security blanket is not permanent.”
Mr. Levin said phased redeployment — not a timetable — would encourage the Iraqi leaders to make “hard compromises” and secure their country.
Under the amendment, a phased redeployment of U.S. troops would begin by Dec. 31, when the Bush administration would be required to submit a plan for continued redeployment beyond 2006.
The co-sponsors are Democratic Sens. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Dianne Feinstein of California and Ken Salazar of Colorado.
Republicans seized on the proposal as “cutting and running.”
“Retreat is not an option,” said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee. “Those calling for an early withdrawal of American troops from Iraq utterly fail to understand the potentially catastrophic implications of their proposal.”
A White House official last night dismissed the amendment, saying it calls for an arbitrary timeline that will encourage terrorists to wait for the United States to leave. “The choice is to stay and win or to allow Iraq to come become a safe haven for terrorists to plot against the United States,” the official said.
Mr. Reed accused Republicans of using Iraq as a political football.
“Instead of offering a blueprint for success, the Bush administration has used the Iraq debate to attack Democrats for wanting to cut and run,” he said.
Mr. Reed said redeployment should begin “as quickly as possible” to ease the strain on the troops, but added that the measure does not establish a pace.
The measure has Democratic support from Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sens. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
Mrs. Clinton said the amendment would send the Iraqi government a message that the U.S. commitment is not indefinite and that Iraq must be responsible for its own security, a Clinton staffer said.
None of the amendment’s announced sponsors or supporters backed a withdrawal measure Thursday that failed on a 93-6 vote.
Women losing coverage under Obamacare, too
- Scalia to students on high taxes: At a certain point, 'perhaps you should revolt'
- Former Ranger breaks silence on Pat Tillman death: I may have killed him
- Special Forces' suicide rates hit record levels casualties of 'hard combat'
- Feds approve powdered alcohol; 'Palcohol' available later this year
- EDITORIAL: Mark Warner running scared?
- CHARLES: Holder's undermining of the law deserving of contempt
- Army goes to war with National Guard, seizes Apache attack helicopters
- Justice at last: 'Evil woman' outed for grabbing girl's game ball
- 'Deport Bieber' petition draws no comment from White House
- Critics rail against liberal bias for commencement speakers
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.